Comments

That's the risk Merkley took, closing negative. I wonder if he thought Steve was out of money?

Regular endorsements in the news may not mean a whole lot, but Governor Kitzhaber on your screen saying Novick is the ONLY one, while a host of papers statewide scroll by with their support, will be effective. Especially with a contrasted message that essentially boils down to "sniffs bait, swims away."

Another good parry by the Novick campaign. If Jeff runs Believe this week while Kitzhaber is running, that won't be good for Jeff at all IMO.

Hey, the Forest Grove paper just hopped on the bandwagon. Is that 8-3 now among general circulation papers?

n a year when Republican candidates – even established senators such as Smith – will face vigorous challenges from energized Democrats, either Merkley or Novick could mount a respectable campaign in the fall.
But our belief is that Novick would best represent Oregon on Capitol Hill.
There’s no question that the feisty Novick, who stands 4-feet-9, has a mechanical hook on the end of his left arm, would break most anyone’s mold.
He already has proved remarkably resilient in this campaign. Much of the Democratic establishment is backing Merkley, who comes from a more traditional political background and has mounted a disappointingly negative campaign. But it was Novick who first announced he would take on Smith – he didn’t wait for the Democratic Party to anoint him, and he is running now without the advantage of party support.
Philosophically, Novick and Merkley aren’t all that different, although Merkley tends toward the pragmatism that comes from having worked within the give and take of a legislative environment. Merkley has his own strengths: his background in world affairs and low-income housing would suit him well for two of the big issues facing the nation. But it is Novick who has best demonstrated the passion needed not only to run a strong race against Smith in November, but also to stand tall for this state in Washington, D.C.

Not looking forward to seeing Republican 527s running and endless loop of Dr. No's endorsement, should the Dems have the misfortune of nominating Steve in the primary.

What, you think Smith's supporters are going to be afraid of going after Merkley any more than they are Novick? That Smith wouldn't blandly claim that Merkley's in bed with almost every union in the state in an attempt to bring socialism to Oregon and the United States (like he did when he was campaigning for George W. Bush against John Kerry 4 yers ago)? That Merkley wants to kill unborn babies because he has the endorsement of Planned Parenthood?

Smith's going to attack whoever is running against him with whatever ammunition he thinks he has. But he and his campaign are going to be choosing what they see as either Merkley's or Novick's weaknesses, which won't necessarily be what other people see as strikes against them.

What, you think Smith's supporters are going to be afraid of going after Merkley any more than they are Novick?

From what I've seen, Kitzhaber is probably more popular across party lines than any other politician in the state with the possible exception of DeFazio.

But let's assume for a minute that a two-term governor who was elected by nearly 2-1 in his second term really is a drag on the ticket. Are you seriously trying to make the case that Novick's latest ad hurts him more than the following:

"Jeff Merkley tried to raise taxes on Oregonians 417 number of times. He even voted for the largest tax increase in Oregon history. Now he wants us to send him to Washington? Jeff Merkley, Wrong on taxes. Wrong for Oregon. For a change... I'm Gordon Smith and I approve this message."

Pat, you trying to say that running Kitzhaber's endorsement is going to hurt Novick more than he ad I just wrote?

Sal and Darrel--
I have been hearing recently that national pundits and GOP politicians/activists have gotten very worried since the attacks connecting the Cong. candidate in La. to Obama failed to work.

Eventually, any political tactic passes the "sell by " date. The year Denny Smith was retired from Congress (only about 5 incumbents had that happen to them that year), the Denny Smith attack ads were everything from silly ("not only is he liberal, but he is hip" about a balding guy who was a policy wonk in many ways) to downright awful (some national publications said the voice of Hitler ad was a tipping point for some voters who thought Denny went over the line).

I know it is close to the primary date. But as far as "Dr. No", even a Republican former legislator I know admitted that they sent some of those bills to Kitzhaber just to make him veto the legislation. Are people who struggle economically or have friends serving in Iraq really going to care that Republicans called a former Gov. Dr. No?

Newsflash--there are people old enough to vote this year who don't remember Kitzhaber as Governor.

I cannot think of another Oregon Democrat who would be as valuable as endorsement as Kitzhaber. Only hardcore Republicans care about the Dr. No tag, and they would not vote for a decent Democrat anyway.

Actually, I do not think Cindy Sheehan would scare away many Oregon voters either.

LT, I'm not sure I understood what your point was in addressing Sal and myself. Neither of us referred to Kitzhaber as "Dr. No."

I was responding to Pat's claim that Kitzhaber's endorsement would harm Novick and that Smith would use it against him in the general election by stating the -- I think almost certain probability -- that Smith is going to attack whoever gets the nomination, on whatever grounds he thinks will work.

People who don't remember Kitzhaber as governor (and that would include anyone who moved here in the last five or six years as well as some younger voters and people who just weren't paying attention) aren't going to be swayed by Kitzhaber's endorsement, true. But then they probably wouldn't be overly affected by negative ads referencing him, either.

I don't know what the specifics of the Louisiana race attack ads were like -- I didn't see any of them -- but there are a lot of reasons negative ads may not work. I doubt they're going to vanish into the sunset.

Pat, you trying to say that running Kitzhaber's endorsement is going to hurt Novick more than he ad I just wrote?

No I'm not Sal.

Are you writing ads for Smith now, or is this one that the Independent Party candidate will have in the hopper?

<hr/>

To Tom and the rest of the Kitz-hearters, I'll just say that Kitz is an excellent endorser for Novick because up close and personal, they are both arrogant and dismissive of views not their own, and contemptuous of any who hold those views.

Not a story I heard or a gratuitous personal attack, just personal observations of these guys up close from one who tends not to swoon when politicians are in the room, however rock solid their credentials with any particular group.

Many other politicians with whom I disagree on a variety of issues are vastly superior to these two guys. I've been in opposition to Rosenbaum, Greenlick, Nolan, Governor Roberts, and half the sitting legislature on a variety of issues yet I continue to respect the hell out of 'em for the simplest of human reasons. They are able to disagree without disrespecting.

If and when the public gets a whiff of this overt sanctimonious disdain that Novick and his endorser Kitzhaber wear like badges of honor, they will run not walk toward Smith.

<hr/>

Oh,yeah. I'm a Democrat and I've been referring to him as Dr. No for years. May be in poor taste (or whatever) but it pales beside the disrespect that he's exibited toward me and anyone else who fails to fall in line behind his received wisdom.

"I've been in opposition to Rosenbaum, Greenlick, Nolan, Governor Roberts, and half the sitting legislature on a variety of issues yet I continue to respect the hell out of 'em for the simplest of human reasons. They are able to disagree without disrespecting."

You must be joking. Greenlick and Nolan are responsible for the ugliest, most classless and sad personal attacks in this race. And they're elected officials, which is doubly pathetic. Not only was their piece littered with inaccuracy, it was the lowest form of political speech--the character smear. Those two are damaged goods now, as far as I'm concerned.

I've been in opposition to Rosenbaum, Greenlick, Nolan, Governor Roberts, and half the sitting legislature on a variety of issues yet I continue to respect the hell out of 'em for the simplest of human reasons. They are able to disagree without disrespecting.

Oops, I take one piece of that back. Merkley's name appears for about a half second on the red banner across the upper left corner of the frame. The words are "Merkley ad attacks Steve." But neither Steve nor Gov. Kitzhaber mention the name in the audio.

Well, I hope you Novick people are right that he can beat Smith. I don't see it happening. I will surely support him in that race if it happens. But, I am saddened that a great guy like Merkley has not been given his due by Novick people for being a great Speaker and progressive reformer. This is why I don't blame Merkley for going negative...I would too if I were belittled as much as he has been by Novick (especially since highlighting the belittling comments of Novick towards other Democrats symbolizes exactly why I don't support Novick).
I think Novick is a solid progressive too, but I don't think he can beat Smith, and don't like his attitude toward someone who has proven his political leadership skills a lot more than Steve. II wish he were more of a happy warrior type in the mold of Paul Wellstone. He is a fighter like Wellstone, just not in the same way.

"But, I am saddened that a great guy like Merkley has not been given his due by Novick people for being a great Speaker and progressive reformer."

That's just wrong. A number of us have praised Merkley as a progressive and as a legislator. But that doesn't mean he has half of Novick's talent. If he had, he would be wiping the floor with Novick, given all the DSCC money.

Rather than criticize Merkley, I choose to spend my time praising Novick. I went to law school with the guy and, like so many of our classmates, I think he's a tremendous person. His old friends at the Department of Justice adored him as well.

Rather than criticizing Novick supporters, why don't you focus on the Cro Magnon who refers to Steve as Dr. No (no doubt because of his handicap). That is sick behavior, and far, far, worse than anything any Novick supporter has said about Merkley.

One of the frustrations with primaries is how they paint caricatures to magnify relatively modest differences. Jeff Merkley isn't a left coast Lieberman clone nor does Novick suffer from undiagnosed tourettes.

Jeff is a talent and had a helluva session in 2007. It was historic. Nothing this campaign season changes what was accomplished on a host of important issues.

I'm supporting Novick because I think he'll run the most aggressive, unrelenting campaign to defeat Gordon Smith. I wouldn't support him if I didn't think he'd be our best shot. I also have full confidence in his ability to pour himself into his work and charm the socks off his colleagues once elected. That's the Novick I know from a decade of working with him in the trenches of progressive politics. Novick could be one of the greats.

It's now clear that Jeff Merkley's positive message to voters is resonating strongly. Additionally, it seems that Democrats are taken aback by Novick's sharp remarks against his fellow party members.

A new poll puts Merkley in the lead, 31-27. In almost every key demographic, Merkley is surging:

Among men, Novick had led by 10, today trails by 2. Among voters age 18 to 49, Novick had led by 5, today trails by 2. Among voters 50+, Novick and Merkley had tied; today, Merkley leads by 7. Merkley and Novick are effectively even in the greater Portland area. Merkley leads by 13 in the rest of the state. Among the 43% of voters who have already mailed their ballot, Merkley leads by 6; among those who are likely to return a ballot, Merkley leads by 3.

So now Merkley has the advantage in both the Portland area and with young people!

This ad by Novick is likely too little too late. Especially too little, considering Novick's Cash on Hand total; I bet this won't be up for more than a couple days few and far between on KATU.

If Novick wins the primary, he and his supporters will have to say publicly what you said,
"Jeff is a talent and had a helluva session in 2007. It was historic. Nothing this campaign season changes what was accomplished on a host of important issues. "

Or do they think a primary victory means all is forgiven and forgotten? Yeah, right, tell me another one. The Kitzhaber ad would be impressive if I never met either Jeff or Steve--time will tell if it changes votes in the primary.

What priciple does Novick stand up for? That opposition to the war should have meant Jeff voting in 2003 the way Novick supporters say he should have voted? "Vote Novick for US Senate because he disapproves of a Merkley legislative vote"?

Today in W. Virginia, Obama was talking about America's duty to veterans, and specifically the Webb 21st Century GI Bill. Just now I looked at Novick's website, and he doesn't have anything specific on the GI Bill.

Merkley does, and has a distinct issues section on veterans, not just part of the defense issue topic.

I know there are people who don't want to hear this, but I began to lose respect for Steve way back when he mentioned the 2003 resolution in the Nick Fish interview and at Sunriver (both of which I was able to watch thanks to Blue Oregon).

I'm the high school friend of a disabled Vietnam vet and the relative of other veterans going back to WWI. But I should share Steve's priorities because he "stands up for principle" (but not maybe the principle that every Oregonian has the right to make their own political decisions and set their own priorities?).

It is Steve and his supporters who say his acerbic (word newspapers use) language is OK because he is "standing up for principle".

WHAT principle? Nothing more important than talking about how the war got started and oh, by the way we shouldn't forget veterans?

Even Gordon Smith signed on as a co-sponsor of the GI Bill. Is Steve going to say that it isn't really important? Or only talk about it if he wins the primary?

I first got involved lobbying veterans issues in the early 1980s, long before it was "cool". Steve may not think veterans issues are as important as the fact that his opponent cast a vote he doesn't like therefore he doesn't deserve respect. But since when must we all conform to Steve's priorities because the fact he "stands up for [unidentified] principle " is all we need to know?

As the election campaign went on, after looking seriously at all the candidates, I finally decided to vote for the legislators running (of course all the Sec. of State candidates are legislators, but candidates for AG, Congress, US Senate aren't).

The whole debate where Novick supporters say no one had the right to object to a single word Steve said at Sunriver or elsewhere about the obscure 2003 resolution, but we should think Nolan and Greenlick were unacceptably nasty to Steve is something which strikes some people as the sort of argument among school kids get into which is mainly namecalling. That is a perception which Novick supporters may just have to live with. I work with school aged kids, so if I don't see things from the point of view of others here, tough luck.

People who think Nolan and Greenlick had just as much right to their use of language as Novick had are not going to put the US Senate campaign above President, Congress, statewide and local elections if Steve wins the primary just because he is the great Steve who deserves our support. (Even if Merkley wins I will be donating more of my time to legislative, congressional, statewide and presidential campaigns than to the US Senate campaign.)

Here's some of what Steve has to say on Veterans' Issues from his Web site:

Taking Care of Our Veterans
Millions of Americans have honorably served our country in Iraq, Afghanistan and other points across the globe – trying to protect us from harm and make the world a better place. But this Administration has let them down – first dispatching them to a wretchedly conceived and poorly planned war and now extending tours of duty and sending members to serve a second, third or even fourth tour in Iraq. But regardless of the wisdom of this war, we must never turn our back on the men and women who have served so bravely and sacrificed so much. It is my pledge that as Oregon’s next U.S. Senator I will fight every day on behalf of our service members and their families. It is the least I can do to repay the debt we all owe them.
Provide for the Health and Recovery of our Wounded Warriors and their Families
There are nearly two million uninsured veterans in America and that number is rising rapidly, according to a recent study by Harvard Medical School. Delays and difficulties in treatment at Walter Reed and other Veterans’ Administration (VA) facilities have been a national embarrassment in recent years. I pledge to fight relentlessly to get our heroes the care they need. Specifically, we must:
* Eliminate the waiting periods, bureaucratic delays and restrictions on eligibility this Administration has used to deny our wounded warriors access to VA services.
* Dramatically expand treatment and rehabilitation services for veterans with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Thousands of men and women are coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan with TBI, with symptoms sometimes not appearing for months or years. The VA must have the staff and services to take care of these veterans.
* Ensure that mental health services, including treatment for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), are available for all in need – especially those veterans returning for Iraq and Afghanistan. All service members being sent into combat should have access to mental health screenings and counseling opportunities.
* Recent expansion of the TRICARE program to provide health coverage to National Guard and Reserves members is an important first step, but insurance is useful only if providers will accept it. The TRICARE reimbursements rates for mental health services and several other areas should be reevaluated to ensure that these members and their families can obtain care in their communities.
* Expand the number of disability claims workers at the VA and standardize their training. This will reduce the substantial backlog in returning veterans seeking a disability claim to support themselves and their family.
* Adopt all of the recommendations of the Shalala/Dole Commission on Care for America’s Returning Wounded Warriors including simplifying the Defense Department and VA disability systems and expanding assistance for families providing home care to injured soldiers.
Reduce the Retirement Age for Those Serving in the National Guard and Reserves
Members of the National Guard and Reserve services are increasingly asked to perform as active-duty soldiers, accepting long, and sometimes repeat, deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan. Repeated, extended activations make it more difficult to sustain a full civilian career and will impede Reservists' ability to build a full civilian retirement, yet they are not eligible for military retirement benefits until they turn 60. In contrast, many federal employees are eligible to retire at 57. The Congress should lower the retirement age for National Guard and Reserves members who have served a full 20 years – at minimum bringing it into parity with the Federal Employees Retirement System.

"Daniel---Dr. Kitzhaber is an MD like Dr. Dean (both were Gov.-----, MD).
Does Steve have a doctorate? Is he normally referred to as Dr.?

There were Republicans who passed obnoxious bills just to force Kitzhaber to veto them, one time brandishing a veto pen that was about 6 feet long.

The name long predates Steve Novick being a public figure or a candidate."

OK. I was assuming because "Novick" begins with the letters "No" and because the Dr. No character from the movies had only one hand, and because the original post was so viciously anti-Novick that the statement referred to his handicap. That's reassuring that it did not.

LT said (quoting Charlie): If Novick wins the primary, he and his supporters will have to say publicly what you said, "Jeff is a talent and had a helluva session in 2007. It was historic. Nothing this campaign season changes what was accomplished on a host of important issues."
Actually, if that happens, what Novick and his supporters should say then is "Beat Smith!" I'm certain most Merkley supporters will agree with that ...
Cheers

To Tom and the rest of the Kitz-hearters, I'll just say that Kitz is an excellent endorser for Novick because up close and personal, they are both arrogant and dismissive of views not their own, and contemptuous of any who hold those views.

People who are "arrogant and dismissive of views not their own" don't achieve the levels of success represented by John Kitzhaber and Steve Novick.

LT, thanks for telling us Novick supporters what we need to say if Steve wins the primary. Please note that one of the most prominent around here just said it before the primary is over. Let me add that he speaks for many of us.

I wonder if you have any views on what the Merkley supporters should say if he wins the primary, as the surge-theorists assure us he will?

"The whole debate where Novick supporters say no one had the right to object to a single word Steve said at Sunriver or elsewhere about the obscure 2003 resolution, but we should think Nolan and Greenlick were unacceptably nasty to Steve is something which strikes some people as the sort of argument among school kids get into which is mainly namecalling."

Then you're not conducting a very deep or honest analysis. The only people who actually DID namecall, were Nolan and Greenlick.

Bill I have to disagree with you. People who succeed a high level of success often times are completely dismissive of other peoples opinions but their own. Novick hasn't been a politician before, where as Kitzhaber is a very successful one. God I wish he was running in this race. His support of Novick doesn't really matter that much to me.

Bill I have to disagree with you. People who succeed a high level of success often times are completely dismissive of other peoples opinions but their own.

Of course, some arrogant and dismissive people do achieve some degree of success, but my point was more to contradict applying that label to Kitzhaber and Novick. In the case of Steve Novick I and others were taken aback at a reception for him a few weeks ago when he expressed his view of the Israel/Palestine situation, and I'm sure some of them let Steve know they disagreed with him. Steve recently came out with his current opinion on this problem, and it suggests to me that he listened to the people who contacted him and expressed their concerns. He has apparently improved on his knowledge of the subject. Although, I believe he has much more faith in Mahmoud Abbas than is justified while his view of Hamas appears to be more hostile than it should be, he clearly was not arrogant or dismissive when people called him on this issue.

Neocons swimming with other sharks in a pool of arrogance do quite well in their native environment, but that human defect doesn't seem to work as well in more liberal spheres. I don't consider Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton as liberals.

To the Oregon Legislature:

Enough is enough. Twice in two years, reasonable gun safety proposals have not even received a vote in the Oregon Legislature. No solution is perfect, but we must act now to save lives. We ask you to commit now to passing reasonable gun safety laws at your next opportunity.

First Name*

Last Name*

Email Address*

Zip Code*

This petition sponsored by BlueOregon and Oregon NOW. By signing, you agree to receive email updates from BlueOregon and Oregon NOW about this petition and other critical issues. (You may always unsubscribe, of course.) Learn more.

To the Oregon Legislature:

Enough is enough. Twice in two years, reasonable gun safety proposals have not even received a vote in the Oregon Legislature. No solution is perfect, but we must act now to save lives. We ask you to commit now to passing reasonable gun safety laws at your next opportunity.

First Name*

Last Name*

Email Address*

Zip Code*

This petition sponsored by BlueOregon and Oregon NOW. By signing, you agree to receive email updates from BlueOregon and Oregon NOW about this petition and other critical issues. (You may always unsubscribe, of course.) Learn more.